Linux for the elderly?
in [UK Linux]
|
From: Bernard Peek on 11 Nov 2009 12:06 In message <ZbAKm.33674$uf7.22966(a)newsfe12.ams2>, Chris Whelan <cawhelan(a)prejudicentlworld.com> writes >On the page that I provided a link to, on the RH side, is a link to >simplicITy (sic). (I have emailed them to ask under what licence the SW >is released.) They are the company marketing it; Wessex just assemble >them. Thanks, I missed that. I tried a Google search for the company name and it didn't find them. I'm just writing an email to congratulate them and wish them luck. -- Bernard Peek
From: Whiskers on 11 Nov 2009 14:41 On 2009-11-11, Martin Gregorie <martin(a)address-in-sig.invalid> wrote: > On Wed, 11 Nov 2009 14:37:57 +0000, Chris wrote: >> Whiskers wrote: >>> On 2009-11-11, Chris Whelan <cawhelan(a)prejudicentlworld.com> wrote: [...] >>> However, this project looks like another small step towards the >>> 'appliance computer' with a simple interface to basic services, and >>> little or no user customisation possible and no 'updates' or >>> 'upgrades'. Like a fridge or a washing-machine. >> >> I don't think that's a bad thing, at all. As long as the advanced >> functions are still their for those who want it. >> > Agreed. If more computer-illiterates had locked boxes with good firewalls > that ran something fairly secure, e.g. Linux with SELinux permanently > enabled, there'd be a hell of a lot less spam on the 'net. Quite. I'm all in favour of the 'appliance computer'. I have a 'netbook' with an OEM user interface based mostly on 'Matchbox', on top of a system derived mostly from Debian - and no extra software or updates available other than from the OEM (or by getting very geeky). That's close to being an 'appliance' - but it still has Sylpheed and a Firefox derivative and so on - with their conventional user interfaces. Putting the executables on 'read only' media (eg ROM or CD-R) would be a good step. -- -- ^^^^^^^^^^ -- Whiskers -- ~~~~~~~~~~
From: Whiskers on 11 Nov 2009 14:54 On 2009-11-11, Bernard Peek <bap(a)shrdlu.com> wrote: > In message <hdeinu$7t7$1(a)news.eternal-september.org>, Chris > <ithinkiam(a)gmail.com> writes > > >> >>The elderly are a good target group, however, as they often struggle >>to adapt to new things. > > Don't say that in uk.people.silversurfers My parents (nearer 90 than 80) manage pretty well with a little help from friends (of similar vintage) and an occasional 'expert' from local independent computer shops. I'm too far away from either of them (they live in different countries) to be much help, so they use Windows 'like everyone else'. Ten years ago, my father had never even used a typewriter or electronic calculator (those being things for subordinates, almost all female of course, to worry about). He now uses email heavily - and has even mastered 'texting' on a mobile phone. On the other hand, I know several people much younger than I am who struggle with 'computers' - or have even given up trying. -- -- ^^^^^^^^^^ -- Whiskers -- ~~~~~~~~~~
From: chris on 11 Nov 2009 17:07 On 11/11/2009 17:02, Bernard Peek wrote: > In message <hdeinu$7t7$1(a)news.eternal-september.org>, Chris > <ithinkiam(a)gmail.com> writes > > >> >> The elderly are a good target group, however, as they often struggle >> to adapt to new things. > > Don't say that in uk.people.silversurfers > Clearly! They aren't the ones I'm thinking of, though. They are the minority.
From: chris on 11 Nov 2009 17:10
On 11/11/2009 14:59, Chris Whelan wrote: > > Funnily enough, it's the ability of children to adapt that makes me think > of them as an ideal group; I've set up Linux desktops that are incredibly > basic, and shown children as young as three how to use them. Some show no > interest; others grasp things straight away. > > When they start using computers at school, inevitably it will be with > Windows, and they can make the switch quite easily. Indeed, and at least they'll know a proper OS first :) |